TRAGIC HISTORY
A review of E.
Michael Jones’s The Jewish
Revolutionary Spirit
Just before Christmas I
finished reading your magnum opus, The Jewish
Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History. Thank you for
giving us this incredible work of scholarship and unparalleled historical
revisionism that has transformed the way I look at the world we live in. This
must be one of the most controversial histories of any people ever written,
depicting the tragic history of the Jews in rejecting Logos, the rational
universal order personified in Jesus Christ, incorporating the earthly
political and social order that He embodied in his human nature and the
rejection of which constitutes the very badge of Jewish revolutionary identity
and activity from that day to this.
JRS is characterised by calm
discussion of the issues and its concise definition of terms, in particular the
“Jew” as one who rejects Jesus Christ as the Messiah and your balance in placing
this definition within the context of the seemingly endless debate about who
the Jews are. In so doing, you simultaneously demolish the myth that the Jews
of the Old Testament and the Jews of today are one and the same people,
something which I never previously appreciated. I never understood the role of
the Talmud in codifying the deliberations of the rabbinical debating society
that Judaism as a man-made ideology became after the destruction of the Temple
in AD70. Nor did I realise that the Catholic Church didn’t learn about the
Talmud until 1236 when Nicholas Donin informed Pope Gregory IX of its
existence.
The concise definitions of
the two most misunderstood terms in contemporary cultural discourse – namely
“the Jews” and “anti-Semitism” – are what makes JRS the
counterrevolutionary tour de force that it is. Just as it shows how the meaning
of the word “Jew” has changed from the beginning of the Gospels to the end, so
it demonstrates that “anti-Semitism” doesn’t mean the same when it was used to
denigrate the sincerity of conversions at the time of the Spanish Inquisition
as it does today when used by people like Daniel Goldhagen whose denigration of
Pope Pius XII inspired JRS. It is extremely difficult if not impossible
to use the term “anti-Semitism” outside a post-Enlightenment setting precisely
because it is a racial term and because as you point out the Middle Ages was a
period within which racial thinking wouldn’t have been understood in the terms
that it is today when it is so bound up with nationality.
One of the most acute
ironies of history is that the two most distinguishing features of Jewish
identity since the destruction of the Temple in AD70 – its revolutionary spirit
and the sense of invincible racial superiority that motivated it and which
received fresh impetus after Napoleon’s defeat – manifested themselves in the
1917 Bolshevik revolution when the revolutionary spirit reached its peak and
the violent counter-revolutionary reaction that it unleashed in Hitler’s Nazism
respectively. Regarding the latter, I would never have identified the origins
of the term “master race” as being anywhere other than the Nazi propaganda
machine of Hitler’s Germany. Yet JRS shows that the same sense of racial
superiority as that asserted by the Jews when they boasted to Jesus that they
were “the seed of Abraham” is both the flip side of Hitler’s anti-Semitism and
its precedent in the Enlightenment Judaism of Moses Hess. How ironic that the
Jewish Messianism of Hess who saw nationalism and socialism as inextricably
linked would also find an uncanny parallel in Hitler’s version of the same
thing as well as being the precursor of Zionism. The English comic genius Spike
Milligan once said, “Money can’t buy you friends but it can get you a better
class of enemy.” JRS proves that anti-Semitism won’t win you friends but
it will make you a better class of racist because of the Jewish consciousness
of being the master race means that those who oppose them attract more
opprobrium than they would in opposing any other racial group.
As someone who has always
taken the Message of Fatima very seriously, I found your comprehensive survey
of Bolshevism and its Jewish roots an absolute revelation particularly Leon
Trotsky’s pivotal role in the October 1917 revolution. Considering the
Trotskyite antecedents of neoconservatism where accretions like permanent
revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat are exchanged for the
alternatives of the “war on terror” and “making the world safe for freedom and
democracy”, I think that in the post-Cold War era this is one of the things
that Our Lady could have meant when she said that Russia would spread its
errors throughout the world.
I also wonder whether Our
Lady chose Fatima as the place to appear to deliver her messages because it
took its name from the name of the daughter of Mohammed, founder of Islam which
has become a counter-revolutionary force against Jewish neoconservatism in the
same way that Nazism was a counter-revolutionary force against Jewish
Bolshevism. If so, this is an example and a reflection of the extent to which
human nature is fallen that it is always the reaction to provocation rather
than the provocation itself that is noticed. Correspondingly, it is always the
sins of the counter-revolutionaries rather than the sins of those who started
the revolution in the first place that are not just noticed but are recorded
for historical posterity and their perpetrators made to look like the original
villains of the peace. This is as true for Islam today just as it was for
Nazism yesterday, notwithstanding the evils perpetrated by both. By appearing
at Fatima in 1917 and saying what she did, was not Our Lady saying that the
only counterrevolution that was/is bound to succeed in this world is that of
Catholicism because it proposes loving our enemies and converting them to
Christ rather than, as Nazism and Islam advocated, hating our enemies and
killing them?
The chapters within JRS
on American history, especially regarding the Black-Jewish Alliance, were very
instructive about the Jewish Communist backers of Martin Luther King and about
MLK himself. They certainly go a long way in explaining why the civil rights
movement and MLK were (and continue to be) such an inspiration for the
neoconservatives and why they have been the model upon which all movements
promoting social justice – even among Catholics – have been based. I also had
no idea about the role played by European Jews in enticing black Americans away
from Christianity and towards revolution. Now the phenomenon of the white Negro
about which Norman Mailer wrote makes more sense if one equates “white” with
“Jewish” especially when one considers, for example, the Jewish origins of
revolutionary music such as hip-hop. I thought that it was a pity, though, that
you didn’t go into more detail regarding the founder of the Nation of Islam
especially his Russian Jewish ancestry. It would also have been useful to have
read more about the Nation of Islam, how it relates to the Black-Jewish
Alliance and how it exemplifies how race and nation supplant religion and place
as the basis of black culture in a way that post-Enlightenment Jewish
revolutionaries would be proud to emulate. Could this have been the reason why,
in the 1997 feature documentary on the 1974 World Heavyweight Boxing match
between George Foreman and Muhammad Ali, the aforesaid white Jewish
revolutionary Norman Mailer extols Nation of Islam member Ali returning into
Africa to win the championship for “his people”?
As a Culture Wars
subscriber writing from England, I found it very sobering to learn that
Freemasonry was exported from here by the Whig government to continental Europe
which certainly explains the English/Continental debate about which version of
Masonry was the more subversive. As someone who was taught Whig history
throughout his education in Catholic schools and colleges, I never appreciated
the magnitude of just how radical was the impact of the Glorious Revolution in
England nor how the revolutionary ideas that had become mainstream in England
by 1789 would prove so devastating to the Catholic monarchy that was France.
You also spell out that the notion that Freemasonry – the Judaized Christian
version of cabbalistic Jewish mysticism – began with the foundation of the
London Lodge in 1717 is itself Whig history that is designed to put a gloss on
the impact of the 1688 Revolution just as much as the artificial debate about
the alleged differences between English and Continental Freemasonry has been
used as a pretext to perpetuate the teaching of Whig history in English
educational institutions – including those under officially Catholic auspices –
ever since.
The only disappointment in JRS
is your treatment of Malachi Martin within the context of Vatican II because of
its excessive reliance on the emotionally-charged memoirs of Robert Kaiser in
his 2002 book “Clerical Error”. This is not to question what is alleged
by Kaiser in blaming Martin for the break-up of his marriage but rather to
point out that documentary evidence has since been unearthed on the
traditionalist side by John Grasmeier of angelqueen.org which is primary source
evidence for Martin’s involvement with the American Jewish
Committee/Anti-Defamation League. It can be found at http://angelqueen.org/articles/07_06_martin_ajc_connection.shtml. I read Martin’s book The Jesuits in 1987 shortly after
graduating in theology. Written under the old Cold War rules of engagement as a
critique of Jesuit support for liberation theology from the former National
Review religion editor that Martin was, it stands as a classic piece of
what might today be regarded as anti-Communist crusade literature particularly
in its outspoken criticism of the 1962 Rome-Moscow Agreement and also by its
dedication to Our Lady of Fatima.
Indeed I maintain that it is
impossible to see the 1962 Rome-Moscow Agreement which is described in detail
in The Jesuits in isolation from Nostra Aetate which is not mentioned
at all in that book. This is especially true when one remembers that Bolshevism
was Jewish in inspiration. Furthermore did it not suit Martin to highlight the
compromise between the Catholic Church and Communism which the Rome-Moscow
Agreement brokered as it bolstered his claim to traditionalist credentials in
opposing liberation theology and by extension the Communist incursion – as he
saw it - into the life of the Church? By emphasising the Rome-Moscow Agreement
and completely ignoring Nostra Aetate – which both in their different
ways manifested the Church’s drawbridge being lowered in the face of the Jewish
revolutionary spirit and its colonisation of modernity – he deflected attention
away from his support for Jewish interests which manifested itself in his
choice of publisher Simon and Schuster and also from how Nostra Aetate
effectively undermined the traditional Catholic teaching on the Jews. Martin
was the quintessential Catholic religious neoconservative who blazed a trail
that would later be emulated by the likes of his contemporaries such as Michael
Novak and then followed by George Weigel and the late Father Richard John
Neuhaus though the former two are unlikely to ever acknowledge this fact.
Taken on their own, however, I think that your chapters on the Second Vatican Council are well worth the price of the book all by themselves. You decisively prove that Vatican II was a battle over whose view of Jewish identity would become normative in the modern era in Church and world – that of the Catholic Church which had traditionally taught that to be a Jew was to be a rejecter of Christ or that of modernity which hails race as the new religion and correspondingly and exclusively identifies Jewishness in terms of blood, race and DNA, the very outlook denounced by Jesus himself in St John’s Gospel.
The combination of the
Jewish consciousness of being the Chosen People together with the incorporation
of the racial concept of anti-Semitism into Nostra Aetate and the
inadequate definition of the same within that document left the door open for
all the enemies of Christ to regard ALL criticism of Jews as anti-Semitic
especially attempts to convert Jews to Christianity.
JRS cogently traces the
historical trajectory of how anti-Semitism has virtually ceased to be used to
describe somebody who doesn’t like Jews but used instead to defame someone whom
the Jews don’t like and how the Jewish lobby used Hochhuth’s play in a failed
attempt to bully the Council Fathers into passing a schema on the Jews that completely
exonerated all Jews of deicide in rejecting Christ. If in the wake of “The
Deputy” this lead to Pope Pius XII who saved Jews being regarded as at
least as much an anti-Semite as Adolf Hitler who killed them, it therefore
makes no difference whether or not a Jew accepts Christ or rejects Him he will
still be saved, not by the supernatural grace of baptism but by the superiority
and purity of his DNA.
JRS is the most important book
that I have ever read on any subject in my life. Not only have you shown how
irrational is rationalism and how revolutions are more likely to be engineered
by the rich from positions of power than they are to be spontaneously initiated
by the weak from the grass-roots but you have dismantled the machinery of
modernity and shown me exactly how it works. From a young age I always wondered
about the impact of the death of Our Lord on the cross upon the unfolding and
the shaping of history but could never find any history textbook that could
even acknowledge, let alone articulate, the impact of the rejection of Christ
as Messiah upon all that has happened subsequently in the history of the world.
This amazing book has answered all my questions. Long may it continue to change
hearts and minds.
Stephen M. Smith
writes from England.
This review appears in the Letters section of the June, 2011
issue of Culture Wars.
Share |
The
Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History by
E. Michael Jones. Jews for Jesus versus Jews against Jesus; Christians versus
Christians versus Jews. This book is the story of such contests played out
over 2000 turbulent years. In his most ambitious work, Dr. E. Michael Jones
provides a breathtaking and controversial tour of history from the Gospels to
the French Revolution to Neoconservatism and the “End of History.” $48 + S&H,
Hardback. [In ordering for shipment outside the U.S., the book's price
will appear as $57 to offset increased shipping charges.] Read Reviews
| Home | Books | CDs/DVDs | Subscribe | e-books | Events | Donate
|
Culture Wars •
Copyright